Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Told You So

I've written previously about my opposition to cities (such as Chicago) and states (such as California) banning in one way or another the sale of foie gras. One of my reasons: A prohibitionistic attitude toward food that will lead to who knows what. Such as what Chicago could do, banning the use of trans fats.

This isn't secondhand smoke here, people. Sure, the population as a whole is paying for some of the costs of the increased unhealthiness caused by trans fats (which are horrible, horrible things for the body). But eating an empanada or a perogie or a french fry that's been boiled in oil containing trans fat doesn't impose our unhealthiness on others, as a cloud of smoke does. (Note: I'm all for banning smoking in restaurants and inside public buildings, have mixed opinions about banning it in bars and am completely against banning it in places like parks or on the street.)

What's next? No more whole milk or heavy cream? Banning hot dogs? Everybody has to start their own farm and raise their own meat because commercial farms are cruel to animals and are horrible for the environment?

Here's an idea, which I'm totally behind. Ban the use of trans fats in schools. For that matter, ban the use of high fructose corn syrup in school meals, too, as well as meat or dairy raised with hormones and most of the crap chemical additives that are included in processed food.

With the huge amounts of money (we're talking about hundreds of millions or billions of dollars) coming from the school systems across the country, the healthier food industry will get the financial boost it needs to really thrive. At the same time, we'll be cutting off some funding to one of the travesties of modern-day eating, the corn and fructose industry, which has its sticky fingers in nearly everything we consume.

THAT, my friends, will lead to a slimmer, more fit, more ready-to-take-on-the-world America. Not this feel-good, knee-jerk PC baloney that we're seeing lately.


Post a Comment

<< Home